Would you still get involved?

[vladimir]

I successfully rescued a drowning and rapidly sinking diver when I was 19 or 20. She was conscious when I brought her to the surface (from maybe 20 feet) and suffered no ill effects except maybe a bruised ego. She later told me, "You were so cool, you talked to me the whole time you brought me to shore." I have to confess, I don't recall talking to her, so maybe I'm not that cool, but acting cool is almost as good, isn't it?

I think some people fall apart under pressure and some respond--if you know which camp you fall into it might inform your choice as to whether or not to get involved. Just from a selfish perspective, to this day it is one of the best moments of my life, and I wouldn't hesitate to do it again, cameras or not. I have no rescue training beyond what we got in basic scuba back then.

 

[drrich2]

How about you? Would it affect your decision to attempt to help? If so, do you think knowing that your actions were being videotaped would limit the scope of your involvement?

I would also like to ask that those who reply indicate whether or not they have been rescue trained, and whether or not they have ever been involved in a real scuba rescue situation. I can answer in the affirmative on both of those questions ...

It would have a chilling effect on my willingness to get involved, I'm not rescue trained but hope to get that someday, and I've not been involved in a rescue situation to date.

I work in the (mental) health care field. Entering emergent care situations without liability coverage and not knowing the situational variables isn't something I relish. Good Samaritan laws vary by state, and people often travel to dive & don't know the ins & outs of the local laws. And be mindful accepting even minor 'gifts' as thanks (say, being treated to dinner or even a drink) can be construed as accepting payment for services and forfeiting Good Samaritan protections, from what I understand.

Good Samaritan laws are not the bullet-proof armor in all situations that some of us might hope for.

As long as the U.S. tolerates this sue-happy liability-crazy culture, there is a serious disincentive to aiding the needy in situations like this. And I imagine that catches up with some people at times.

Which is sad.

Richard.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

In most states Good Samaritan law would protect me as long as I stayed within my training.

... therein lies the rub. You give a lawyer a video of just about any real-life rescue and they will certainly find something in it that wasn't covered in your training ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Teamcasa]

Rescue trained and have participated in more than one rescue.

I doubt my focus would be altered much by the presence of a video camera but until it actually happens, I'll stick with that thought.

 

[divebelly]

I am not trained in rescue, but I would like to believe that if there was something I could do to assist someone in need that I would do it regardless of a video camera. What is really sad to me is that we live in a time where you have to worry about getting sued for trying to help someone.

 

[oceanbound]

am rescue trained and have not been involved in a scuba rescue and wouldn't hesitate to give aid if needed

 

[fjpatrum]

My post on the other thread seems not to have made it for some reason. Maybe I forgot to submit it?

I wouldn't let someone videotaping stop me from anything. I've been a volunteer ground SAR team member for over 10 years now and it's just something you have to deal with as best you can. Sometimes the video can be very helpful for debriefing later and rescue critique. As someone mentioned on the other thread, the stress of dealing with that type of situation can make people make mistakes. Being able to see those mistakes, once the adrenaline has cleared, can be a very effective training tool.

That said, if I weren't directly involved in recovery/rescue efforts, I'd do everything I could to inhibit any "looky-loos" from getting film of a rescue in progress, whether they were just bystanders or press.

I have no dive rescue training or experience with dive incidents that required rescue efforts.

 

[fjpatrum]

the same applies to any journo or photographer.

someone should be recording events in life so people can learn and remember. however, if that person happens to be specifically trained to be able to assist then you have a duty of care ( i believe)

I think duty of care is only for professional medical personnel, not individuals who happen to have training.

 

[FritzCat66]

I would think that, if there are already plenty of rescuers and they don't need your help, then your first priority should be to stay out of their way. Beyond that, I don't see that it matters much whether you are recording what you see in organic memory or in digital memory.

Some buddies of mine are EMTs; they have to deal with plain spectators as well as press at all kinds of scenes. It's just part of the job for professionals.

Conversely, I also have a close friend who is a photojournalist for my hometown paper. He's been yelled at sometimes for being a "vulture" at bad scenes, but he's just doing his job.

I haven't taken a rescue course, but maybe they ought to at least briefly cover dealing with gawkers, spectators, and press.

 

[Trimix2dive]

Texas good samaritan law - bite me. You cannot suit me for trying to help you not die or get injured.